Turn Off Ads?
Page 6 of 9 FirstFirst ... 23456789 LastLast
Results 76 to 90 of 130

Thread: Reds sign Mike Stanton

  1. #76
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Lubbock, Texas
    Posts
    1,362

    Re: Reds sign Mike Stanton

    Quote Originally Posted by Falls City Beer View Post
    No contradiction in what I'm saying, if you really cared to read my points.

    As long as they don't complain about their spending, I don't obviously mind the size of the contracts. But experience tells me we fans will be chastised 8-10 months from now by John Allen, Wayne, & co. for not coming out to see his sub-.500 ballclub lose.

    The comment about "terrible move" (though the notion that Mike Stanton would cost anyone $2.75 million is breathtakingly horrible) had very little to do with the dollars per se, but with Stanton as the recipient of those dollars.
    Then explain why you think he's horrible.

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #77
    Man Pills
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Philadelphia
    Posts
    25,085

    Re: Reds sign Mike Stanton

    Quote Originally Posted by Handofdeath View Post
    Then explain why you think he's horrible.
    I was told during the season when Wayne was throwing around dookie in the dark and seeing which wall it would stick to that I should just be patient: I'd see, they said, when he has a full offseason he won't be so desperate and won't be picking up marginal last-gasp arms to fill out the bullpen.

    Well, here we are: offseason central, and he's going out and collecting the same castoffs, except now he's giving them big contracts.

  4. #78
    Man Pills
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Philadelphia
    Posts
    25,085

    Re: Reds sign Mike Stanton

    I know Wayne's thought process vis. Stanton. I know it note for note.

    He's seeing that Stanton surrendered only two HRs all last season. But he's ignoriing the park factors for that phenomenon and he's ignoring the fact that Stanton walked a vertiginously high 27 batters in 73 innings. And he's ignoring that he doesn't K anybody. So he's fixating on his ability to "keep the ball in the park." Sounds good. But when you have a BP like the Reds, it's just a constant case of filling up the bases with runners (which Stanton will do if you believe his WHIP the last couple of seasons) only to hand it over to someone else who can't strike anybody out, ad infinitum, ad nauseum. Stanton looks JUST LIKE EVERY OTHER no strikeout, nibble-artist in this godforsaken bullpen!

  5. #79
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Lubbock, Texas
    Posts
    1,362

    Re: Reds sign Mike Stanton

    Quote Originally Posted by Falls City Beer View Post
    He's 40 years old.

    He was mediocre last season.

    He was mediocre last season in parks that are highly friendly to pitchers (PacBell & RFK).

    We have fourteen soft-tossing lefties already on the roster, so it doesn't change the looks opposing teams will get from our bullpen.
    Age has nothing to do with ability. That "soft tosser" is 51st all-time in K/9. 24th among active players. 70th all time in games finished. 16th on the active list. There wasn't anything mediocre about his season last year.

  6. #80
    Man Pills
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Philadelphia
    Posts
    25,085

    Re: Reds sign Mike Stanton

    Quote Originally Posted by Handofdeath View Post
    Age has nothing to do with ability. That "soft tosser" is 51st all-time in K/9. 24th among active players. 70th all time in games finished. 16th on the active list. There wasn't anything mediocre about his season last year.
    As someone said on another thread, it's a great move...for 1996.

    Age, unfortunately, has a ton to do with ability. (Says this 40 year old).

  7. #81
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Lubbock, Texas
    Posts
    1,362

    Re: Reds sign Mike Stanton

    Quote Originally Posted by Falls City Beer View Post
    As someone said on another thread, it's a great move...for 1996.

    Age, unfortunately, has a ton to do with ability. (Says this 40 year old).
    Horse hockey. Mike Stanton pitched 26 games and 23 and 1/3 innings for the Giants. That soft tosser K'd 18 and walked only 6. 3.09 ERA and 1.24 WHIP. Oh yeah he also had 8 saves. He may not be a sexy signing but he's a good one.

  8. #82
    Member Highlifeman21's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Bristol, just around the corner from ESPN
    Posts
    8,694

    Re: Reds sign Mike Stanton

    Quote Originally Posted by Handofdeath View Post
    Horse hockey. Mike Stanton pitched 26 games and 23 and 1/3 innings for the Giants. That soft tosser K'd 18 and walked only 6. 3.09 ERA and 1.24 WHIP. Oh yeah he also had 8 saves. He may not be a sexy signing but he's a good one.

    I think your definition of good signing and the definition of good signing for most sane people differ greatly.

    The money we wasted on Stanton is just throwing gas on a fire to try and solve the problem, but instead of gas, we're throwing money. Throw money at a problem and get zero results, phenomenal way to run a ballclub.

  9. #83
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Lubbock, Texas
    Posts
    1,362

    Re: Reds sign Mike Stanton

    Quote Originally Posted by Highlifeman21 View Post
    I think your definition of good signing and the definition of good signing for most sane people differ greatly.

    The money we wasted on Stanton is just throwing gas on a fire to try and solve the problem, but instead of gas, we're throwing money. Throw money at a problem and get zero results, phenomenal way to run a ballclub.
    Why don't you tell me why he's such a bad signing. FCB called him a soft tosser which just meant he didn't bother to do his homework because I showed him to be no such thing. All I hear is how mediocre he is but no one has given anything supporting why he is.

  10. #84
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    The Bush Leagues
    Posts
    9,347

    Re: Reds sign Mike Stanton

    Quote Originally Posted by Falls City Beer View Post
    No contradiction in what I'm saying, if you really cared to read my points.

    As long as they don't complain about their spending, I don't obviously mind the size of the contracts. But experience tells me we fans will be chastised 8-10 months from now by John Allen, Wayne, & co. for not coming out to see his sub-.500 ballclub lose.
    I think your looking to closely at the tea leaves. WK made three moves in short order that don't move the budget line very far one way or the other. (And, I'd argue resolved some issues). Stanton's looked solid the last couple of years, but I'm not going to the mat over the signing. But I don't think it portends of anything.
    The widow is gathering nettles for her children's dinner; a perfumed seigneur, delicately lounging in the Oeil de Boeuf, hath an alchemy whereby he will extract the third nettle and call it rent. ~ Carlyle

  11. #85
    Brett William Moore Will M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Crescent Springs KY
    Posts
    3,698

    AP Story

    CINCINNATI --_ Needing a shortstop and a late-innings reliever, the Cincinnati Reds committed roughly $20 million to fill two of their bigger holes. Later, they spent a little more to get rid of their logjam behind home plate.

    One of baseball's most active teams isn't slowing down in the offseason.

    Shortstop Alex Gonzalez and left-handed reliever Mike Stanton finalized multiyear contracts Monday with the Reds. Cincinnati then traded catcher Jason LaRue to Kansas City for a player to be named, agreeing to pay part of his $5.2 million salary next season.

    The Reds were one of the more aggressive teams last season under new owner Bob Castellini, making a flurry of trades that transformed their roster. Cincinnati finished in third place in the NL Central with an 80-82 record, its sixth straight losing season.

    The moves on Monday suggested they're still going full-speed.

    "Stay tuned," said general manager Wayne Krivsky, who has acquired 40 players since he took over last spring training.

    The light-hitting Gonzalez, 29, committed only seven errors last season with Boston. Stanton, 39, split the season between Washington and San Francisco, where he had eight saves and proved he can still pitch effectively on short rest.

    Together, they'll fill a couple of big gaps.

    Gonzalez is expected to improve a defense that had the second-most errors in the National League last season. He hit .255 with 24 doubles and nine homers for Boston.

    Gonzalez gets $3.5 million next year, $4,625,000 in 2008 and $5,375,000 in the third year. If he wins the Gold Glove in either of the first two years, the third-year salary increases to $5.5 million. There's a $6 million mutual option for 2010 with a $500,000 buyout.

    "We'll take the .260 and that Gold Glove-caliber defense and be happy with that," Krivsky said.

    Felipe Lopez started at shortstop last season, but was undependable on routine plays and was part of an eight-player trade with Washington in July to restock the bullpen. Cincinnati got shortstop Royce Clayton as part of the deal, but he hit .258 and started only nine games in September.

    The Reds also have been trying to upgrade their bullpen since the middle of last season. Left-handed closer Eddie Guardado, acquired from Seattle in one of those midseason trades, had reconstructive elbow surgery in September and won't be ready to pitch at the start of next season.

    Stanton gives the Reds a proven option for late in games. He went 3-5 with a 4.47 ERA in 56 games last season for Washington, which traded him to San Francisco on July 28 for a minor league pitcher. Stanton was 4-2 in 26 games for the Giants with eight saves and a 3.09 ERA.

    "He's shown he can close games, but he hasn't done it over a full year," Krivsky said. "I'm not going to get into projecting roles."

    Stanton gets salaries of $2 million next year and $3 million in 2008. There's an option for 2009 at $2.5 million, with a buyout of $500,000. If he appears in 140 games over the next two seasons, the option-year salary vests at $2.75 million.

    Stanton's deal was negotiated by Sam and Seth Levinson, who have represented him for more than two decades.

    Stanton said in a telephone interview from the Cincinnati airport that about a half-dozen other teams also made offers. Stanton wanted to be closer to the East Coast --_ his family lives in New Jersey -- and wanted to play for a team that could contend.

    When Krivsky increased his original offer to a two-year deal, Stanton accepted.

    "Obviously, the second year had a big influence on it," Stanton said. "It's still very early in the free agency period. It just looked like the right deal to me."

    Although he saved games for the Giants, Stanton said it doesn't matter whether he's in a set-up role or closing games for the Reds, who were in contention until the last week of the season.

    "What the organization and the team have done and what they're going to do shows they're going in the right direction," Stanton said. "I don't want to spend any time away from my family, more than I have to, especially if you're just playing out the season. I want to win."

    LaRue was the No. 1 catcher heading into spring training, where he tore cartilage in his knee and had surgery. He moved behind David Ross and Javier Valentin at the spot, and never regained a full-time job.

    Ross started 73 games last season and hit .255 with 21 homers. LaRue hit only .194 with 57 starts. Valentin started 32 games behind the plate and was the team's top pinch hitter.
    .

  12. #86
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Dayton, OH
    Posts
    45

    Re: AP Story

    Quote Originally Posted by Will M View Post
    "Stay tuned," said general manager Wayne Krivsky
    Zito?

  13. #87
    Man Pills
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Philadelphia
    Posts
    25,085

    Re: Reds sign Mike Stanton

    Quote Originally Posted by Handofdeath View Post
    Why don't you tell me why he's such a bad signing. FCB called him a soft tosser which just meant he didn't bother to do his homework because I showed him to be no such thing. All I hear is how mediocre he is but no one has given anything supporting why he is.
    I gave you a lot. You just don't care to examine it.

    I think the onus is on you to point out why he's good. And no, talking about the entirety of the guy's career doesn't count--we're talking abou his recent past, i.e. last year, which is likely to give us the closest reading of what he's going to produce.

    You pointed to his stint in SF--I'll point to his stint in Washington, a great pitcher's park: 1.53 WHIP. Looks like a nibbler to me at this point in his career.

  14. #88
    Member Highlifeman21's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Bristol, just around the corner from ESPN
    Posts
    8,694

    Re: Reds sign Mike Stanton

    Quote Originally Posted by Handofdeath View Post
    Why don't you tell me why he's such a bad signing. FCB called him a soft tosser which just meant he didn't bother to do his homework because I showed him to be no such thing. All I hear is how mediocre he is but no one has given anything supporting why he is.
    1. He's 40 years old
    2. He walks way too many people (27 in 68 IP last season)
    3. We wasted money on something that wasn't better than what we already in house
    4. He doesn't strike people out (lil better than 2:1 K:BB for his career, only 855 in 1056 career IP)
    5. He blew 6 saves last year in 14 SVO. Stellar.
    6. He has declining K/9 rates.
    7. That 1.40+ WHIP last year really screams 2 year deal. Above his career norm of 1.33.
    8. 1.07 G/F in 2 pitcher parks. Excellent
    9. Allowed OPS of .710 in 2006. Again, above his career norm of .692.
    10. When your numbers start going to the wrong side of your career norms, stay way the hell away, and especially at over 2M per year.

  15. #89
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Lubbock, Texas
    Posts
    1,362

    Re: Reds sign Mike Stanton

    Quote Originally Posted by Falls City Beer View Post
    I gave you a lot. You just don't care to examine it.

    I think the onus is on you to point out why he's good. And no, talking about the entirety of the guy's career doesn't count--we're talking abou his recent past, i.e. last year, which is likely to give us the closest reading of what he's going to produce.

    You pointed to his stint in SF--I'll point to his stint in Washington, a great pitcher's park: 1.53 WHIP. Looks like a nibbler to me at this point in his career.
    You didn't give me anything. You said his being 40 was part of why he was mediocre. No, being 40 is a sign of being a good pitcher. You called him a soft tosser but gave no proof. I showed you how ludicrous that statement was. You want to include that time in Washington? Ok, 67 and 2/3 innings pitched and he had 48 K's. Soft tosser? Pitched in 82 games last year too. He's not the best signing out there but he's a good one.

  16. #90
    Mon chou Choo vaticanplum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Posts
    7,250

    Re: Reds sign Mike Stanton

    Quote Originally Posted by Highlifeman21 View Post
    1. He's 40 years old
    39! He is 39!!!!! Officially he is not even 39 and a half!
    There is no such thing as a pitching prospect.


Turn Off Ads?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please.

Thank you, and most importantly, enjoy yourselves!


RedsZone.com is a privately owned website and is not affiliated with the Cincinnati Reds or Major League Baseball


Contact us: Boss | GIK | BCubb2003 | dabvu2498 | Gallen5862 | LexRedsFan | Plus Plus | RedlegJake | redsfan1995 | The Operator | Tommyjohn25